A Time For Choosing

[wing2000]

One of the few Republican leaders with the courage to speak the truth.

Rep. Liz Cheney, speaking at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library on Wednesday, said it’s time for Republicans to make a choice: Donald Trump or the Constitution.

"We are confronting a domestic threat that we have never faced before – and that is a former President who is attempting to unravel the foundations of our constitutional Republic," Cheney said. "And he is aided by Republican leaders and elected officials who have made themselves willing hostages to this dangerous and irrational man."

She told the audience that Republicans "cannot both be loyal to Donald Trump and loyal to the Constitution," to a round of applause after she recounted the allegations the Jan. 6 committee, of which she is a member, has brought against Trump surrounding his actions on that day in 2021.

Quoting Reagan:
“No party and no people and no nation can defend and perpetuate a constitutional republic if they accept a leader who’s gone to war with the rule of law, with the democratic process, or with the peaceful transition of power, with the Constitution itself.”


Liz Cheney: 'Republicans cannot be both loyal to Donald Trump and loyal to the Constitution'
Liz Cheney calls Trump 'domestic threat,' says Republicans cannot support both him and Constitution

 

[sandman]

She is just a neck blowing bubbles

 

[essentialsaltes]

Last night in California, the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation & Institute hosted the latest event in its “Time for Choosing Speaker Series,” which has brought big-name Republicans to Southern California to “address critical questions facing the future of the Republican Party.”

Previous speakers are mostly 2024 presidential aspirants, including former VP MIKE PENCE, former Secretary of State MIKE POMPEO, former New Jersey Gov. CHRIS CHRISTIE, South Dakota Gov. KRISTI NOEM, Maryland Gov. LARRY HOGAN, former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. NIKKI HALEY, and Sens. TIM SCOTT (R-S.C.) and BEN SASSE (R-Neb.).

One name not on the Reagan Library’s guest list: Donald Trump.“Trump has not been invited because he’s a former president, and we’re looking to hear from leading voices that haven’t held that level of office,” a spokesman for the Reagan Library told me.

I think the library also wants to avoid the danger of Air Force One rolling over in its hangar.

 

[Always in His Presence]

One of the few Republican leaders with the courage to speak the truth.

Rep. Liz Cheney, speaking at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library on Wednesday, said it’s time for Republicans to make a choice: Donald Trump or the Constitution.

"We are confronting a domestic threat that we have never faced before – and that is a former President who is attempting to unravel the foundations of our constitutional Republic," Cheney said. "And he is aided by Republican leaders and elected officials who have made themselves willing hostages to this dangerous and irrational man."

She told the audience that Republicans "cannot both be loyal to Donald Trump and loyal to the Constitution," to a round of applause after she recounted the allegations the Jan. 6 committee, of which she is a member, has brought against Trump surrounding his actions on that day in 2021.

Quoting Reagan:
“No party and no people and no nation can defend and perpetuate a constitutional republic if they accept a leader who’s gone to war with the rule of law, with the democratic process, or with the peaceful transition of power, with the Constitution itself.”


Liz Cheney: 'Republicans cannot be both loyal to Donald Trump and loyal to the Constitution'
Liz Cheney calls Trump 'domestic threat,' says Republicans cannot support both him and Constitution

It strikes me that if she were speaking for her party and a majority believed what she was saying - she should be a shoe in for re-election.

Liz Cheney given 10% chance of winning reelection: CNN

It seems the time of choosing includes if her constituents believe her and will vote her back into office. They are the ones making a choice also.

 

[Saucy]

Telling people who they can or can't support is anti-free speech and anti-constitution and anti-democracy. If it's between a Democrat or Donald Trump, I will choose Donald Trump every single time. I do hope a better candidate emerges. I'm praying for DeSantis, but if Trump is the nominee, he gets my vote. Democrats are even more dangerous.

There's a reason why this so-called committee didn't invite any pro-Trump members. They only wanted anti-Trump opponents so they can lambast him without giving any opportunity for rebuttal. This is 100% political and considering the dismal ratings, not taken too seriously.

 

[wing2000]

It strikes me that if she were speaking for her party and a majority believed what she was saying - she should be a shoe in for re-election.

Liz Cheney given 10% chance of winning reelection: CNN

It seems the time of choosing includes if her constituents believe her and will vote her back into office. They are the ones making a choice also.

“If we embrace the lies of Donald Trump, if we tell the people of Wyoming something that is not true, we will soon find ourselves without the structure and the basis and the framework of our constitutional republic,” Cheney said during the debate broadcast by Wyoming PBS ahead of the Aug. 16 primary.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ic-governors/#link-FPZCHCKU2ZC7DJKOWGMS7B3XQY

 

[durangodawood]

“If we embrace the lies of Donald Trump, if we tell the people of Wyoming something that is not true, we will soon find ourselves without the structure and the basis and the framework of our constitutional republic,” Cheney said

Shes 100% right about this.

To bad shes a "small govt", anti environment, pro fossil fuels, so-called traditional values conservative, so I cant vote for her. Plus shes in the wrong state.

 

[wing2000]

Shes 100% right about this.

To bad shes a "small govt", anti environment, pro fossil fuels, so-called traditional values conservative, so I cant vote for her. Plus shes in the wrong state.

Our representatives take an oath to defend the Constitution. If they fail to do so, our 200+ year experiment will be over. We are a nation of laws, not men.

 

[durangodawood]

Our representatives take an oath to defend the Constitution. If they fail to do so, our 200+ year experiment will be over. We are a nation of laws, not men.

People may have agreed when their particular ideology was pre-eminent. But the prospect of demotion to a minority position has them re-thinking genuine representative democracy.

The emerging majority of "wrong people" are starting to get represented too much.

 

[Always in His Presence]

“If we embrace the lies of Donald Trump, if we tell the people of Wyoming something that is not true, we will soon find ourselves without the structure and the basis and the framework of our constitutional republic,” Cheney said during the debate broadcast by Wyoming PBS ahead of the Aug. 16 primary.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ic-governors/#link-FPZCHCKU2ZC7DJKOWGMS7B3XQY

And yet she has a one in ten chance of re election and was censured by her own state party.

 

[wing2000]

And yet she has a one in ten chance of re election and was censured by her own state party.

I guess we know the state party's choice.

 

[wing2000]

Wyoming U.S. House Republican Candidates on January 6

Wyoming U.S. House Republican Candidates on January 6 | C-SPAN.org

https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/154...dcEANz32wP6nl3mXc0ssKX-LW-BVE6PaYqObrM7e4cxF8

 

[rjs330]

I think Cheney's obvious hatred for Trump and her allying herself with the democrats on this has damaged her beyond recovery.

She doesn't have to support Trump, she just doesn't have to support this circus of a committee. This whole thing is a conspiracy theory equal to Trump's theory that the election was stolen. That's what is taking her down.

Trump was a great president. He was a lousy, loudmouth, crude human being and a sore loser. I don't want him back.

But I do want him left alone. He did nothing to organize, plan, order or participate in what happened on Jan 6. Some of his supporters decided to riot and trespass into the capitol. Arrest them all, throw em in jail.

But Trump didn't tell, order plan, organize or participate in those actions.

Let it go and let's move on. You are further dividing this country.

If the republicans are smart and sometimes I have my doubts, they will not vote Trump as the candidate. Doing so will guarantee another loss as people are sick and tired of this whole thing. We don't need him. We have some great options for candidates.

 

[rjs330]

I think Cheney's obvious hatred for Trump and her allying herself with the democrats on this has damaged her beyond recovery.

She doesn't have to support Trump, she just doesn't have to support this circus of a committee. This whole thing is a conspiracy theory equal to Trump's theory that the election was stolen. That's what is taking her down.

Trump was a great president. He was a lousy, loudmouth, crude human being and a sore loser. I don't want him back.

But I do want him left alone. He did nothing to organize, plan, order or participate in what happened on Jan 6. Some of his supporters decided to riot and trespass into the capitol. Arrest them all, throw em in jail.

But Trump didn't tell, order plan, organize or participate in those actions.

Let it go and let's move on. You are further dividing this country.

If the republicans are smart and sometimes I have my doubts, they will not vote Trump as the candidate. Doing so will guarantee another loss as people are sick and tired of this whole thing. We don't need him. We have some great options for candidates.

 

[Fantine]

I disagree with Cheney politically but I admire her character and integrity.

She has the morals and ethics the Republican Party desperately needs.

I am a liberal, but it is good for states and countries to have vibrant strong parties. I hope that she and others who left in disgust--Paul Ryan, John Boehner, and more--will give conservatives a party they can feel good about supporting.

 

[wing2000]

I think Cheney's obvious hatred for Trump and her allying herself with the democrats on this has damaged her beyond recovery.

First sign of a weak argument is to question another's motive. Cheney has made it clear why she is opposed to Trump. He is a threat to our democratic republic.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Our representatives take an oath to defend the Constitution. If they fail to do so, our 200+ year experiment will be over. We are a nation of laws, not men.

Agreed.

I would argue though that Trump is the result of the undermining of the Constitution by these two parties for decades....little by little, piece by piece.

So another "Trump" is coming....even if it's not Trump.

 

[SimplyMe]

Telling people who they can or can't support is anti-free speech and anti-constitution and anti-democracy. If it's between a Democrat or Donald Trump, I will choose Donald Trump every single time. I do hope a better candidate emerges. I'm praying for DeSantis, but if Trump is the nominee, he gets my vote. Democrats are even more dangerous.

There's a reason why this so-called committee didn't invite any pro-Trump members. They only wanted anti-Trump opponents so they can lambast him without giving any opportunity for rebuttal. This is 100% political and considering the dismal ratings, not taken too seriously.

That would be false. Congressman Troy Nehls was approved to be on the committee and could have been a part of it. I even posted an article where he specifically states he isn't serving on the committee because of Minority Leader McCarthy. The House Minority Leader told all Republicans they weren't to be on the committee. And if you aren't aware of Congressman Nehls, he is a former sheriff from Texas that is a huge Donald Trump supporter.

It is the Republicans that blocked Trump supporters (and pretty much any Republican, except for the two willing to disobey the party leadership), not Democrats.

 

[Fantine]

During Trump's first impeachment, the congressmen McCar5hy wanted to appoint were obstructionists who played pranks and blocked access to meetings and had no interest in looking at the charges and developing thoughtful rebuttals.
Committee members can disagree but should respect one another.
During the impeachment hearings, I had to fast forward through the disruptors. Irrelevant, strident, an embarrassment to the government they pledged to serve.

 

[Ana the Ist]

During Trump's first impeachment, the congressmen McCar5hy wanted to appoint were obstructionists who played pranks and blocked access to meetings and had no interest in looking at the charges and developing thoughtful rebuttals.
Committee members can disagree but should respect one another.
During the impeachment hearings, I had to fast forward through the disruptors. Irrelevant, strident, an embarrassment to the government they pledged to serve.

Impeachment hearings?

The ones that ultimately decided not to impeach?